Upload
buidieu
View
220
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Achieving Singapore’s Desired
Outcomes of Education Through
Restorative Practices: A Case Study of Ping Yi Secondary
School
SHARING for the DAY
What are Singapore’s Desired Outcomes
of Education?
Overview of Ping Yi’s RP journey
Lesson Study
Research Findings
Q&A Session
Mr Abdul Malek Bin Osman
Currently, teaching in Ping Yi Secondary School, Singapore
Head of Department (Mathematics), School Staff Developer (Covering)
Bachelor of Engineering (Hons), National University of Singapore
Diploma in Education (National Institute of Education, Singapore)
Diploma in Departmental Management (National Institute of Education, Singapore)
Mr Ryan Neo Currently, teaching in Ping Yi Secondary School, Singapore
Head of Department (Pupil Management)
Bachelor of Engineering (Hon), Nanyang Technological University
Diploma in Education (National Institute of Education, Singapore)
Experience working as Civil Engineer in Private Sector
MOE Video
Confident Person Thinks independently
Communicates effectively
Has good inter-personal skills
Self-directed Learner Takes responsibility
for own learning
Questions, reflects, perseveres
Uses technology adeptly
Concerned Citizen Is informed about
world and local affairs
Empathises with and
respects others
Participates actively
Active Contributor Exercises initiative
and takes risks
Is adaptable, innovative, resilient
Aims for high standards
C2015 Student Outcomes
A School of Distinction in
Learning & Service
Academic Excellence Character Development
Organizational Excellence
INTEGRITY
RESPECT
CARE
To nurture and develop
our students to be strong and upright in
character, passionate about learning,
innovative in spirit so
as to serve the community.
No of Students (1230)
Express 418 (34%)
N A 589 (47.9%)
NT 223 (18.1%)
Total 1230
Distribution by Race
Chinese 52%
Malays 28.5%
Indians 14%
Others 5.5%
Primary School Leaving
Examination Mean Score
(average over 5 yrs)
Express 199
NA 158
NT 103
Student Residence
HDB 1-3 room 29.7 (21.1)
Financial Assistance
Scheme
248 (20%)
Achievements
Outstanding Character Development Award
Outstanding National Education Award
Academic Value Added results for the last 5
years
Higher than national average in Quality School
Experience survey in stems relating to teacher-
student and student-student relationship
Decreasing trend in recalcitrant of major
offences for the last 5 years
“Learning occurs
when students and
teachers interact.
Thus, to improve
learning implies
improving the quality
of that interaction” Mc Kinsey Report on education 2009
Restorative Practice
Philosophy: Every child can achieve
Principles:
- Building relationships
- Repairing relationships
- Wrongdoing is a violation of people and relationships
- Putting rights the wrong
- Reaffirming relationships
- develop relational practices to prevent incidents of
inappropriate behaviour
First 4 RP Pilot
Schools in
Singapore
• Woodlands Ring Sec
• St Andrew’s Sec
• Junyuan Sec
• Ping Yi Sec
RESTORATIVE PROGRAMME
2005
RP SCHOOL CULTURE
RP Values
DISCIPLINE CURRICULUM
PUPIL/ STAFF MANAGMENT
SOCIAL EMOTIONAL LEARNING
TOOLS
4 ‘R’ Approach
• Reculture school
• Redesign curriculum
• Review curriculum time
• Restructure school
organization
NE, Service Learning, ACE,
Work Attachment, Lifeskills,
IPW, Learning Journeys
TEACH (Classroom teaching)
SUPPORT (Pupil Management)
RE-DIRECT (Pupil Development)
House System, Leadership devt,
CCAs, CIP, Service Learning,
Career Guidance, Sec 3 camp,
Prefects, Orientation camp,
Enrichment programme, Overseas
Exchange programme, SFE
Year Head system, PSLs,
Leadership devt, HOT, VIP
Responsible
Ping Yians
Our Goal
Ping Yi
Restorative
Pyramid
Values
Systemic Changes to develop RP
Culture in PYSS
Year Head system for horizontal
integration
House system for vertical integration
“Values for Breakfast” Programme
Relational Teaching
Management of students’ misbehaviour
using RP
RP Tools for curriculum
Professional Learning Community
Professional
Development Structure for
Singapore teachers
Identify key issues in the
classroom and school
Work collaboratively to
address issues for the
benefit of the students
Link Between Circle Time
Outcomes with Singapore DOE’s
Circle Time
Outcomes
Key Stage Outcomes of
Education
“Does lessons conducted using RP’s
Circle Time, with appropriate questioning
techniques, enhances development of self
confidence, communication and inter-
personal skills of students?”
Problem Statement
1 year study
Selection of teachers & class
Crafting of survey questions
Pre & Post Observation
Tagging of Transcripts
Lesson Study : Processes
2 teachers were identified and selected
Profile of teachers Teacher A
Female
4 years in service
Major in teaching of Mathematics
Trained to conduct circle time
Teacher B Male
4.5 years in service
Major in teaching of English
Trained to conduct circle time
Lesson Study : Selection of
Teachers
2 groups of students selected
Profile of class Class A
Age group – 13 years old
Co-ed
Ethnic composition: Malay, Chinese, Indian
Academic status: Express (High Average Ability)
Class B Age group – 15 years old
Co-ed
Ethnic composition: Malay, Chinese, Indian
Academic status: Normal Academic (Average Ability)
Lesson Study : Selection of
Class
Based on literature reviews, descriptors
that characterizes student’s engagement in
class were identified
Question stems were crafted
Survey were administered to students
before and after intervention
Sample of survey
Lesson Study : Crafting of
Survey Questions
Classroom observation conducted for both
teachers
Teacher A (Class with 30 minutes duration)
Teacher B (Class with 60 minutes duration)
All lessons were recorded
Recorded lessons were analyzed and
transcribed
Lesson transcripts were then tagged
Lesson Study : Pre & Post
Observations
Conversational transcripts were tagged according to
these processes
Every lesson broken down to 10 minutes episodes
Each episodes were analyzed for these 2 key
descriptors
Classroom Discourse (Univocal Discourse vs
Open Ended Questions vs Closed Ended
Questions)
Talk Time (Teacher Talk vs Student Talk vs
Non Verbal)
Lesson Study : Tagging of
Transcripts
From the data, an increase in the numbers of episode that has more open-ended questions was observed in circle lessons of both teacher A and B
An increase in the percentage of open-ended questions from non-circle to circle lessons was also observed for both teachers
Lesson Study : Analysis of
Data
Open-ended questions are more dominant across the entire duration of circle lessons compared to non-circle lessons.
Students have more chances of verbalising their thoughts throughout the entire lesson
Teachers have a higher tendency of asking open-ended questions in circle lessons
This is beneficial to the development of students’ self awareness and effective communication skills which are part of Singapore’s key educational outcomes.
Lesson Study : Implications
Comparisons between the non-circle and
circle lessons show an increase in
Student’s Talk-time in circle lessons
Lesson Study : Analysis of
Data
Students are more likely to air their views
and participate in discussions in circle
lessons.
Conducive for developing self confidence
and communication skills of students
Lesson Study : Implications
Sound quality of the videos captured
Lack of specialised software to transcribe
and analysis data
Lack of a greater pool of teachers
comfortable to conduct circle lessons,
resulting in a small sample size of students
and lessons studied
Lesson Study : Limitations
Conclusion
Increased and improved communications between teacher-students and students-students
Reflective learners resulting in deeper learning and development of self-confidence
Develop inter-personal and communication skills
Bibliography Ballard, J. (1982). Circle Book. New York, Irvington. Ministry of Education, Singapore. 2009. Desired Outcomes of Education. From the MOE website, http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/desired-outcomes/
Smith, Charlie. (2003). Introducing Circle Time to Secondary Students. Inyahead Press, Australia.
Carpenter, T. P., & Lehrer, R. (1999). Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. In E. Fennama & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 19-32). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Wertsch, J. V., & Toma, C. (1995). Discourse and learning in the classroom: A sociocultural approach. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.). Constructivism in education (pp. 159-174). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Resnick, L. B. (1988). Treating Mathematics as an Ill-Structured Discipline. In R. I.
Charles & E. A. Silver (Eds.), The Teaching and Assessing of Mathematics Problem Solving (pp. 32-60). Reston, VA: Lawrence Erlbaum, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to Think Mathematically: Problem Solving, Metacognition and Sense Making in Mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Mathematic's Teaching and Learning: A Project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 334-370). New York: Macmillan. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1994). Reflections on Doing and Teaching Mathematics. In Mathematical Thinking and Problem Solving. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lloyd, G. M. (2008). Teaching Mathematics with a New Curriculum: Changes to Classroom Organization and Interactions. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 10(2), 163-195.
Cobb, P., Boufi, A., McClain, K., & Whitenack, J. (1997). Reflective discourse and collective reflection. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 258 – 277. Mitchell J. Nathan, Billie Eilam, Suyeon Kim (2007). To Disagree, We Must Also Agree: How Intersubjectivity Structures and Perpetuates Discourse in a Mathematics Classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, Volume 16, Issue 4 October 2007 , pages 523 - 563
Thompson, A. G., Philipp, R. A., Thompson, P. W., & Boyd, B. A. (1994). Calculational and conceptual orientations in teaching mathematics. In A. Coxford (Ed.), 1994 Yearbook of the NCTM (pp. 79-92). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Thank you! A copy of the slides presented may be
downloaded from our school’s website:
http://www.pyss.edu.sg/index.php